If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

... Canonical didn't want to contribute to Wayland because they didn't want to get tangled into too much talking and politics. They just did their own thing separately realizing that trying to contribute to wayland it would have been a nightmare.

I'd really like to know where you buy your shovels and what size they are, 'cause you shovel that crap like a BO$$.

I was referring to flexibility as in how flexible the desktop version is, not that you can install it on a robot.

Wayland should have been the future X.org but since it took them so long to get it going, Canonical, instead of waiting even more, rolled out their own thing faster. Hopefully they can talk to other companies to support it and if they make it popular by including it on Ubuntu (which is quite popular whatever you may say) then there won't be any fragmentation as wayland will be dead. At this rate it just seems that Wayland is the one that is causing the fragmentation. Canonical said they will do something and did it. Wayland, watching its progress, seems amateurish at best.

As much as it sucks to admit it, sometimes corporations do deliver better results than amateurs. It could be that if the management is good they can focus the employees on the objective compared to open source where there is basically no management, nobody can tell you what to do or else you're fired. It sucks I know. I like the idea that projects spring into existence created by a guy and evolve naturally, just like in biological evolution with no one directing anything. But sometimes evolution is just too slow and a company can bring the future today faster.

Canonical didn't want to contribute to Wayland because they didn't want to get tangled into too much talking and politics. They just did their own thing separately realizing that trying to contribute to wayland it would have been a nightmare.

from your post i can tell you're maybe around 12? and, contributing to wayland it would have been a nightmare if you did not know how to code like Most Ubuntu Developers, this is why MS has contributed more to Linux Than Ubuntu has, do you know why Ubuntu is Using Debian as it's base? if Wayland Die's and all of it's code is removed from the Kernal Tool Kits Etc what are the Mir Developers doing to do? seeing how Mir is just a Piggy back off from Wayland, and Android.

I was referring to flexibility as in how flexible the desktop version is, not that you can install it on a robot.

You were talking about the flexibility of the different OSes, which naturally applies to their complete fields of application.

Anyways:

Wayland, watching its progress, seems amateurish at best.

Yeah, for sure, Mir with wildly copy and pasting and flicking it together is by far more professional than first defining a well thought out protocol that everyone can use. You must be kidding.

As much as it sucks to admit it, sometimes corporations do deliver better results than amateurs.

Only that you get it backwards, the Wayland developers are the professionals, with years of experience with Linux display servers, while Canonical hired the amateurs that weren't even able to analyze Wayland correctly and came up with non-existing technical reasons why they can't use it.

Arduino dosn't run Linux, unless you include YÚN witch isn't on the market yet.

Originally Posted by BO$$

I was referring to flexibility as in how flexible the desktop version is, not that you can install it on a robot.

You have an odd definition of flexibility, are you sure you are not referring to usability (rather subjective to what you do with your computer) and market share?

Originally Posted by BO$$

Wayland should have been the future X.org but since it took them so long to get it going, Canonical, instead of waiting even more, rolled out their own thing faster. Hopefully they can talk to other companies to support it and if they make it popular by including it on Ubuntu (which is quite popular whatever you may say) then there won't be any fragmentation as wayland will be dead. At this rate it just seems that Wayland is the one that is causing the fragmentation. Canonical said they will do something and did it. Wayland, watching its progress, seems amateurish at best.

Wayland is still a lot further at this point in time then Mir.
Clutter and QT have full Wayland support, EFL and GTK+ are almost complete and SDL is on it's way. And they have XWayland witch is further ahead then XMir. Mir has XMir. It is also to early to declare a victor, or the demise of any of the two. You simply seam to be forcasting the future from a biased/incomplete view.

Originally Posted by BO$$

As much as it sucks to admit it, sometimes corporations do deliver better results than amateurs. It could be that if the management is good they can focus the employees on the objective compared to open source where there is basically no management, nobody can tell you what to do or else you're fired. It sucks I know. I like the idea that projects spring into existence created by a guy and evolve naturally, just like in biological evolution with no one directing anything. But sometimes evolution is just too slow and a company can bring the future today faster.

Wayland developers are not just a bunch of hobbyists, Kristian Høgsberg started the project while working for Red Hat and is currently employed by Intel, who intend to use it as there display server on there tablet platform.

Because of the fragmentation that is killing the linux platform. GTK Qt and others aren't doing any favors. Now there will also be Wayland and Mir. Just perfect. Windows has Win32 and that is all. You deal with it and make everything look consistent. Linux is just too fragmented. A company should come and standardize one of those and achieve real market penetration. Then everybody will be more or less forced to support it if they want to be popular => less fragmentation => less annoyance and inconsistency. Unity and now Mir are a step in the right direction. If Canonical also manages to get Ubuntu preinstalled on a lot of PCs the future looks good.

It's sad to be the one breaking it up to you, but still.

How does Mir help in the *current* fragmentation of the Linux desktop? Well, considering it's mostly toolkits (which Canonical said will be supported *both* by Mir) and audio (which has not much to do with either display system), it does not help.

How does Mir prevents fragmentation? Taking into account it doesn't help on the toolkits side, but adds a new backend, it doesn't help, but creates new problems.

So, nope, it doesn't help, I'm sorry.

Originally Posted by BO$$

DEs. Too many DEs. People need at least a sane default. Gnome 3 is always changing and extensions don't work from one version to the next. KDE could be good if it didn't look as it does. People don't seem to like the colours chosen, effects etc. Unity for both desktops and mobile seems to work.

A suggestion for life: if you don't understand a problem, do not pretend you have the solution.
DEs is not the problem. As long as they support a common standard (hint: they do, read ICCCM and EWMH for more information), apps are treated the same way. Both the looks and the extra, unneeded, disk and memory use, come from the toolkits.
So, the problem you mention is in the toolkits side. And since they are supposed to be supported on Mir, Mir doesn't help to avoid this fragmentation.

People want consistency so if Ubuntu achieves enough market penetration they will probably go with Qt which looks a bit better than GTK+. And hopefully GTK+ will die a slow horrible death. One toolkit is enough. GTK+ programmers will adapt.

You must not be a developer...
Most default applications in Ubuntu use GTK by the way.

But they move Unity to Qt from what I've heard so I thought they must have chosen Qt for the future.

I am a developer but never had anything to do with either Qt or GTK. From what I read Qt uses C++ while GTK uses some horrid design trying to make C like C++ using GObject. That thing should be banned.

What really should be banned is making such statements based on admittedly uninformed opinions. And you still managed to avoid an answer to the question why you think that adding more fragmentation is a good thing to prevent fragmentation.